Martin, Zimmerman and Executive branch commentary...

[DeanRx 69]

Yeah Packsaddle, a pretty decent article regarding the issue. However, the author fails to mention ANYTHING about Mr. Obama's follow on comments, comparing Trayvon to himself 35 years ago and the " we need to spend some time in thinking about how do we bolster and reinforce our African American boys". That statement to me is openly biased and tiptoes upon being racist.

[Stosh 3452]

Yeah Packsaddle, a pretty decent article regarding the issue. However, the author fails to mention ANYTHING about Mr. Obama's follow on comments, comparing Trayvon to himself 35 years ago and the " we need to spend some time in thinking about how do we bolster and reinforce our African American boys". That statement to me is openly biased and tiptoes upon being racist.

It's only racist if it applies to "the other guys", ya, know, the guys with the "different colored skin", "those that don't look like us".

 

Racism is a two way street. Traffic travels both ways. Certain racists haven't figured that out and thus they don't think themselves the horrible despicable people they are pointing out.

 

The only true non-racist is the guy who forgets to mention any differences. I have always used the rule-of-thumb, if someone mentions race first, they are most often the racist, kinda like the Godwin's Law.

[King Ding Dong 540]

I dream of an America where the President represents ALL Americans and not just the ones who look like him.

George Bush sure didn't represent me.

 

Can you name a President in the last 50 years who represented ALL Americans ? I just don't think it is possible.

[SR540Beaver 116]

I dream of an America where the President represents ALL Americans and not just the ones who look like him.

You may not have liked GWB's politics. At times, I didn't either. But there is no question that he didn't share equal concern for every citizen of the US. Obama has decided to speak out about a local case that is only a national story because the race mongers like Sharpton and Jackson along with a complicit media fabricated an issue where none existed. Obama chose to point a finger at whites being racist against blacks. Obama chose to emphasize that blacks have a history and experience that they view today's world thru and ignore all of the progress that has happened. After all, he is black and President of the US. Obama chose to ask what we can do to make things better for young black men? His comments were pointed at white Americans. He chose at that moment to represent a single segment of society and chastise the rest. Agree with him or not, Bush represented the interests of every American. Obama chose a different path with this speech. It's a path that any color POTUS should never travel. He chose to speak to a self defense case already decided ina court of law and make it a race issue when it wasn't.

[danbrew 31]

The way I see the Martin / Zimmerman case is that both parties had multiple chances to avoid a fatal encounter and BOTH probably disregarded those opportunities. Why? Was it race? Maybe. Was it good old fashion male machismo? More likely. Was it a wanna be cop / Lone ranger runs up against a tough attitude, take no crap teenager? Most likely. Probably that third one with some life experience racial assumptions from both parties as icing on the top of the powder keg. Do I think Zimmerman is innocent, heck no. Do I think given the facts as they are known and the charge(s) the prosecution went with there was any other ruling than not guilty because the state could not prove beyond a reasonable doubt? Nope, not a chance. Do I think both men (yes Martin was a man in the physical sense) moved towards a confrontation instead of away from one? Yup... problem was, one of them was bringing a snack to a gun fight and had no way of knowing it at the time.

 

You know, there's another perspective as well. Perhaps George Zimmerman was a homeowner that volunteered in his community. A community that had suffered a rash of robberies in the weeks/months leading up to this incident. You said Martin 'brought a snack to a gunfight'. Really? How about the MMA style fighting that he brought to a fight? Had Zimmerman not had that gun he'd be dead instead of Martin. What do you think the likely outcome if Martin had tried that beat down on a cop? Seems pretty clear that Martin was headed for prison or an early grave regardless.

 

As far as I'm concerned - and surprising as all get out - the jury arrived at a just verdict.

 

It's all over and done with, yet I'd bet many hadn't heard any of this: http://theconservativetreehouse.com/2012/05/24/update-26-part-2-trayvon-martin-shooting-a-year-of-drug-use-culminates-in-predictable-violence/. It's on the internet - it MUST be true. lol.

 

And, getting back on subject, I'll give President Obama the benefit of the doubt and believe his comments were intended to slow the racial fires that were brewing.

 

[packsaddle 753]

It IS over. Zimmerman got away with it. Why are you still trying to justify something that you acknowledge is "done with"?

[Huzzar 39]

Why are you throwing rocks at the hornet's nest by posting anything on the subject and in particular "got away with it" versus "was found not guilty?"

 

Mr. Pot I'd like to introduce you to Mrs. Kettle...

[packsaddle 753]

The last post on this topic was on 24 July before Danbrew decided to start it up again on 9 August....and I'm the one throwing rocks at a hornet's nest?

 

OK, if that's the level of judgment you exercise, so be it.

 

Zimmerman did get away with it. I don't know how anyone could interpret that 'found not guilty' verdict any other way. He killed an unarmed person. He claimed self defense and didn't receive any punishment. Seems clear enough. If you think this is stirring something up, think of it instead in these terms....I'm delighted that this precedent opens an opportunity for me that I didn't realize I had before Zimmerman clarified things.

 

This fall, when that guy who does this every fall trespasses on my property hunting something or other, I can at last confront him while carrying my concealed weapon so he won't know what's about to happen. Then I can surprise him and blow him away, and then claim self defense and get away with it. It will be even clearer in my case because he will actually be armed and dangerous.

 

And afterwards, I expect the same level of excuse for me that some of us have applied to Zimmerman. It's only fair.

[King Ding Dong 540]

The last post on this topic was on 24 July before Danbrew decided to start it up again on 9 August....and I'm the one throwing rocks at a hornet's nest?

 

OK, if that's the level of judgment you exercise, so be it.

 

Zimmerman did get away with it. I don't know how anyone could interpret that 'found not guilty' verdict any other way. He killed an unarmed person. He claimed self defense and didn't receive any punishment. Seems clear enough. If you think this is stirring something up, think of it instead in these terms....I'm delighted that this precedent opens an opportunity for me that I didn't realize I had before Zimmerman clarified things.

 

This fall, when that guy who does this every fall trespasses on my property hunting something or other, I can at last confront him while carrying my concealed weapon so he won't know what's about to happen. Then I can surprise him and blow him away, and then claim self defense and get away with it. It will be even clearer in my case because he will actually be armed and dangerous.

 

And afterwards, I expect the same level of excuse for me that some of us have applied to Zimmerman. It's only fair.

Pack, do it with style. You should be real handy with that machete collection of yours.

[packsaddle 753]

The last post on this topic was on 24 July before Danbrew decided to start it up again on 9 August....and I'm the one throwing rocks at a hornet's nest?

 

OK, if that's the level of judgment you exercise, so be it.

 

Zimmerman did get away with it. I don't know how anyone could interpret that 'found not guilty' verdict any other way. He killed an unarmed person. He claimed self defense and didn't receive any punishment. Seems clear enough. If you think this is stirring something up, think of it instead in these terms....I'm delighted that this precedent opens an opportunity for me that I didn't realize I had before Zimmerman clarified things.

 

This fall, when that guy who does this every fall trespasses on my property hunting something or other, I can at last confront him while carrying my concealed weapon so he won't know what's about to happen. Then I can surprise him and blow him away, and then claim self defense and get away with it. It will be even clearer in my case because he will actually be armed and dangerous.

 

And afterwards, I expect the same level of excuse for me that some of us have applied to Zimmerman. It's only fair.

Heh, heh, no...I intend to be the one still standing. The machete would violate one, maybe two, of my personal rules of conduct.

[Huzzar 39]

You could have let sleeping dogs lie but you chose not to and instead tried to stir the pot again. Your follow-up proves my point. And you're a mod for crying out loud. I take it you're a last-word kinda guy too.

 

[Oldscout448 697]

The last post on this topic was on 24 July before Danbrew decided to start it up again on 9 August....and I'm the one throwing rocks at a hornet's nest?

 

OK, if that's the level of judgment you exercise, so be it.

 

Zimmerman did get away with it. I don't know how anyone could interpret that 'found not guilty' verdict any other way. He killed an unarmed person. He claimed self defense and didn't receive any punishment. Seems clear enough. If you think this is stirring something up, think of it instead in these terms....I'm delighted that this precedent opens an opportunity for me that I didn't realize I had before Zimmerman clarified things.

 

This fall, when that guy who does this every fall trespasses on my property hunting something or other, I can at last confront him while carrying my concealed weapon so he won't know what's about to happen. Then I can surprise him and blow him away, and then claim self defense and get away with it. It will be even clearer in my case because he will actually be armed and dangerous.

 

And afterwards, I expect the same level of excuse for me that some of us have applied to Zimmerman. It's only fair.

If your nose is broken and the back of your head is bleeding from apparent slamming on a sidewalk ( or a rock ) then yes I will give your claim of self defense the fairest hearing I can muster.

[King Ding Dong 540]

The last post on this topic was on 24 July before Danbrew decided to start it up again on 9 August....and I'm the one throwing rocks at a hornet's nest?

 

OK, if that's the level of judgment you exercise, so be it.

 

Zimmerman did get away with it. I don't know how anyone could interpret that 'found not guilty' verdict any other way. He killed an unarmed person. He claimed self defense and didn't receive any punishment. Seems clear enough. If you think this is stirring something up, think of it instead in these terms....I'm delighted that this precedent opens an opportunity for me that I didn't realize I had before Zimmerman clarified things.

 

This fall, when that guy who does this every fall trespasses on my property hunting something or other, I can at last confront him while carrying my concealed weapon so he won't know what's about to happen. Then I can surprise him and blow him away, and then claim self defense and get away with it. It will be even clearer in my case because he will actually be armed and dangerous.

 

And afterwards, I expect the same level of excuse for me that some of us have applied to Zimmerman. It's only fair.

I think I have enough experience with self-abuse for the job.

[danbrew 31]

Apparently I didn't realize that there was a time limit afforded to relevancy. Mea culpa. I'll just let the comments (and the jury's decision) stand.